WTKA Roundtable: Sam, Mark Snyder, Callers Dave & Mark

In the WTKA interview, Mark Snyder said that his interviews with the anonymous sources for the August 30, 2009 story were "unsolicited."  That is untrue.  It is a lie. 

10a Roundtable Part 3, at about the 5:00 to about the 6:30 time-mark. 

I sort of think that Snyder was actually trying to say that the interviews that he and Rosenberg did were "uncoordinated."  But he said "unsolicited."   In fact, with the eight or so players (and parents) that he and Rosenberg interviewed, their interviews were (we are told) not shared or otherwise coordinated, and so to the extent that the players told similar stories of their football-activity time, Snyder and Rosenberg obviously believe those stories to be credible, and the Freep expects its readership to regard them as credible.

Here's the thing -- the obvious thing, really, that Brian Cook was confronting Mark Snyder with, in about the first 48 hours that the Freep ran its story -- while we are told by Snyder that the players all told similar stories, the identities of the players, the specific questions put to them, and the nature of their answers has never been revealed by the Free Press and will probably never be revealed. 

Brian Cook had of course immediately suggested that there had been a huge misunderstanding, by the Free Press reporters, or their interview subjects, or both, about the precise nature of "countable time."  Brian confronted Snyder in the first Rodrgiuez presser following the Sunday 8/30/09 Free Press publication.  Snyder walked away.

And it was particularly rich, to hear Mark Snyder complain that he could not accept that the Free Press story had now been essentially refuted by Michigan/NCAA investigation, because he didn't know which players were interviewed, and he did not know how they were interviewed and what exactly was said.  Jesus Fracking Christmas; that was the complaint that people had with the Free Press story!

In listening to this, I confess that I was a bit frustrated, since Sam Webb wasn't as prepared to cross-examine a hostile expert like Mark Snyder as I might be if I were in court with him.  That's certainly not Sam Webb's job, "cross-examination."  But it's a pity, because that is what Snyder deserves.

In 10b-Roundtable Part 3, at about the 4:00 mark, Snyder freezes when he is confronted with the notion that he interviewed some players who were never told about the nature of the story that Snyder was working on.  When Snyder catches himself, he proclaims that he "did not mislead anyone" in the course of any of his interviews. 

I have no doubt, that Snyder thinks that he is getting away with technical truths on that subject, without saying what really happened.  And somebody should have asked Snyder what really happened in the interviews with Je'Ron Stokes and Brandin Hawthorne.  Because I think it is a simple story.  Snyder, on media day, approached the two freshmen, and asked them about practice time.  Without saying what the purpose or thesis of his story was.  By that time, he and Rosenberg were weeks into working up their story.  A story that was "a month in the making" by the admission of Freep Editor Paul Anger.  What Snyder got from the two freshman were quotes that were completely out of context from the issue of CARA reporting and countable time.

As we all know, the Columbus Dispatch did a similar story, nine months later, asking similar questions and getting similar answers (with respect to "coaching" by non-coaches or "watching" by persons other than non-coaching QC people) and the story was laughed off (probably rightly) as evidence of the general widespread confusion on the subject, until you talk to a real Compliance Officer.

But of course Snyder and Rosenberg never did that in the Michigan story.  And that, my friends, is probably the grandest question of all, that Snyder wasn't forced to answer today:  Why not, before you go to print, ask questions of the Athletic Director's office, the Compliance Services Office, or the Football Coaching Staff?  After all, to fail to do that would be a gross violation of this portion of the Freep's Ethics Policy:

We are committed to fairness and balance in all aspects of our coverage and presentation. These principles are foremost in building trust with readers. To that end, we strive for journalism free of favoritism or prejudice. We recognize that pure objectivity is impossible, but we demand fair coverage. We vigorously pursue comment from all subjects in our coverage. We attempt to examine the many sides of issues and strive for balance among competing interests.

 Free Press ethics policy | freep.com | Detroit Free Press http://www.freep.com/article/99999999/MISC/50926003/Free-Press-ethics-policy#ixzz0yE5TLeoM

So there you have it, Mark Snyder.  I say to you, Snyder, and to every other reader of this blog, and every writer who prowls this site for information, and every sportstalk radio program host or producer in Detroit who comes to MGoBlog for source material:  You, Mark Snyder, are lying when you say that the Freep interviews for the August '09 story were "unsolicited." 

And you are a hateful hypocrite when you complain about not having the names and details of the interview subjects in the Michigan/NCAA investigation.  You have done the same with the original story. 

And Snyder you are being wilfully deceptive when you suggest that you had been fair to Stokes and Hawthorne in their interviews. 

And finally, Snyder, you and Rosenberg have committed one of the grossest imaginable violations of the Free Press Ethics Policy with your August '09, in which you no only never sought out both sides of the story, but you deliberately avoided one side of that story, such that you wouldn't even request FOIA documents until you made sure that the publication had been a fait accompli before your cover was blown.